Men posing as delivery workers allegedly frightened office employees before a Houston police response and subsequent terroristic-threat charges.
HOUSTON, TX — Three men described as longtime social media pranksters are accused of taking a stunt into a River Oaks office building, where their actions frightened workers and prompted a large Houston police response, according to news reports and court records.
Edward Gonzales, Antonio Aguirre and Roland Zepeda were identified by ABC13 as facing charges of making a terroristic threat after the incident at River Oaks Tower on Kirby Drive. Earlier Harris County court-record reporting reviewed by the Houston Chronicle showed felony cases against Gonzales, 35, and Anthony Aguirre Jr., 38, while another participant was named in a complaint but had not been charged at that point. The available reports differ on the spelling of Aguirre’s first name and the precise charging status of the third man at different stages of the case.
Court records cited by the Chronicle allege that men dressed as delivery workers entered the office building and began yelling and knocking on doors. One woman told investigators she heard someone outside her office threaten to shoot if a door was not opened. She was on a virtual call at the time and directed the person on the other end to contact 911, according to the records.
The woman told police she saw a figure in the hallway and heard someone trying her doorknob. Believing the threat could be real, she also contacted family members and asked them to call authorities, according to the Chronicle’s account of the court records. The reported threat helped turn what the suspects allegedly viewed as a social media stunt into an active-shooter scare for people inside the building.
Another office worker, Houston attorney Chris Morrell, told ABC13 that he heard loud yelling in the lobby before men entered his office. Morrell said he did not know whether they were armed and described the encounter as tense. He said the men claimed to be making a delivery, asked for personal information and appeared to be trying to provoke a reaction from people in the office.
Houston police responded to the building, which was placed on lockdown while officers searched it, according to court records cited by the Chronicle. People inside were moved to a room on the first floor as police checked the property. ABC13 reported that the response also involved the department’s SWAT team. No violence was reported in the accounts reviewed.
Aguirre was detained at the building, according to the Chronicle. Court records cited by the newspaper say he initially told police he was looking for a job. Investigators later alleged that he said he had been paid $200 to film the event and that the other men had traveled to different places to record social media pranks intended to provoke reactions. Aguirre told police he did not remember anyone making a threat to shoot, according to the same records.
The incident follows earlier publicity surrounding Gonzales and Zepeda. ABC13 reported that the pair drew attention in 2016 after being filmed playing basketball on a highway entrance ramp. The Chronicle reported that Gonzales later pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor related to blocking traffic in that episode. It also reported a separate misdemeanor case involving Gonzales after an incident in which cash was thrown into a Houston roadway and traffic was disrupted.
The latest allegations carry greater stakes because prosecutors and investigators say workers believed they were facing a genuine threat rather than a staged stunt. Morrell told ABC13 that he feared the confrontation could have escalated because people inside the office did not know the men’s intentions or whether they had weapons. He said the incident ended without violence.
ABC13 reported that it attempted to reach Gonzales and that he answered the telephone but ended the call shortly afterward. His attorney did not respond to the station’s request for comment. Earlier Chronicle reporting said an attorney was not listed for Aguirre at the time of its report. The available material does not establish how the defendants intend to respond to the allegations in court, and the charges remain accusations unless proven.
Author note: Last updated August 14, 2026.